phineasandferbfandomcom-20200223-history
Phineas and Ferb Wiki:Nominations for administratorship
This page is for nominating users to become administrators of the site. *If, after no less than seven days from the nomination, the voting is unanimous and the nominee has accepted, then a bureaucrat will grant the user administrator privileges. If no consensus has been reached within fourteen days, the nomination is rejected. *If rejected, the user must wait 30 days before becoming eligible to be nominated again. There is no limit to the number of times a member may be nominated. Voting Etiquette In order to vote on nominations for administratorship, you must be a registered user with more than 5 un-reverted edits. There are three sections for each nomination: Support, Oppose, and Comments. *Use a # sign instead of a * to mark the votes so it is easy to see the number of votes. *The nominee should not vote for himself, but instead mark the initial section of the nomination as Accepted along with his signature. The nominee may make additional comments in the Comments section. *You may provide a rationale (reason) when supporting a nomination. *You must provide a rationale when objecting to a nomination. Any objection that clearly has no connection to this project or one that does not list a rationale can be considered invalid. *If you wish to discuss the nomination without voting, use the comments section. *If you wish to remove your vote, please strikethrough it by surrounding it with . This is so we can accurately track the voting, especially once it's archived. Nominations User:RRabbit42 (For: 5|Against: 0) RRabbit42 has been a member of this wiki since September 13, 2008. With nearly , he currently ranks as the third most active user. He's been here editing when there were only a handful of us editing. He always keeps a cool head when dealing with new users and problem users alike. He single-handedly made the FAQ and wrote the "I, Brobot" article including its gallery. He is really good at keeping an eye on edits and never overreacts to vandalism. —Topher 04:18, 7 April 2009 (UTC) Support #With his level head and cool demeanor, he makes an excellent candidate to become an administrator for this wiki. —Topher 04:18, 7 April 2009 (UTC) #Very good choice. —'Excelsior,' The Flash - ([[User talk:SuperFlash101|Talk to me, talk to me, talk to me bay-bay!]]) 04:24, 7 April 2009 (UTC) #He is very active in this wiki, has a lot of good edits and is very deserving to be administrator-Ardi 04:32, 7 April 2009 (UTC) #RRabit42 is deserving to be an administrator. He has good edits, is an excellent candidate to be an administrator for this wiki. He is a rightful administrator.—Mai 06:18, 7 April 2009 (UTC) #RRabit42 deserves to be an administrator. He does a great work and he helps alot on vandalism. He deserves it. -Perryfan 18:10, April 7, 2009 (UTC) ''Voting closed: Nomination successful. —Topher 04:23, 14 April 2009 (UTC)'' Oppose Nomination accepted —RRabbit42 02:43, 9 April 2009 (UTC) Comments I was trying to think up a clever way to accept the nomination, but all I could come up with were clichés: I will be firm yet fair, Nixon's "I'm not a crook", Sally Field's "You like me, you really like me", et cetera. So maybe I'll just say this: thanks for the nomination. —RRabbit42 02:43, 9 April 2009 (UTC) :Go for it. He deserves to be an admin fair and square. 21:08, 13 April 2009 (UTC) Moved from "Support." Unregistered users not eligible to vote. —Topher User:Ardi (For: 5|Against: 1) Ardi is a editor because He fights off vandalism, (seen below) he helps extend pages, he helps users (also seen below), plus he reports vandals. He would make a good admin because he's such a good editor. Phin68 02:51, 13 May 2009 (UTC) Support # I think that Ardi is a very good editor. He fights off vandalism and helps users (he helped me once). He would make a great admin. Phin68 16:06, 7 May 2009 (UTC) # I think that JC to be first, but I don't oppose. Ardi has a lot of good edits and deserves to be a third administrator, even though he's only been editing since February, he has more than 1000 edits in just about three months. I bet he will be a good third administrator like RR and Topher before. Go Ardi! Mai # I think Ardi deserves to be a administrator in the wiki. He has done alot for the wikia in such a short time. He really deserves being an administrator.—Perryfan 22:18, 09 May 2009 (UTC) # What I've seen of Ardi's contributions have been good. I like the idea of an admin from a country other than the United States. It will give a different perspective, and being in a different time zone means we have greater coverage for reviewing what gets changed during the day. — RRabbit42 06:02, 13 May 2009 (UTC) # Ardi's been nothing but a good contributor since day one and always seems willing to help out new users. Even though his time on the wiki has been short, he's managed to accumulate 1000 edits already. He may need a bit of help with his new buttons, but that's what RRabbit and I are here for. —Topher 05:09, 14 May 2009 (UTC) Oppose *Not really that much opposed, but Ardi's still a fairly new user. He's only been around since February. Once he get's a year in, I'm all for; he just needs to be more experienced. —'Excelsior,' The Flash - ([[User talk:SuperFlash101|Talk to me, talk to me, talk to me bay-bay!]]) 18:39, 7 May 2009 (UTC) Nomination accepted —Ardi Correspondence Talk 00:17, 13 May 2009 (UTC) Comments *Also, might I add this nomination is incomplete. It isn't valid until all points at Phineas and Ferb Wiki:Administrators#Nominations. Add a short summary, whoever first nominated. I as well am opposed to this, not because of his quality (since it's always good) but he's been around for 2 months only. We have users here who've been around since last year. Give it a year, I say, than thumbs up, Ardi. —'Excelsior,' The Flash - ([[User talk:SuperFlash101|Talk to me, talk to me, talk to me bay-bay!]]) 02:02, 11 May 2009 (UTC) :*Um....I'm serious. This nomination is invalid. Please fix it. —'Excelsior,' The Flash - ([[User talk:SuperFlash101|Talk to me, talk to me, talk to me bay-bay!]]) 19:45, 12 May 2009 (UTC) ::We'll have it fixed soon. Phin68 20:46, 12 May 2009 (UTC) :Who's "we," the nominator, you? —'Excelsior,' The Flash - ([[User talk:SuperFlash101|Talk to me, talk to me, talk to me bay-bay!]]) 21:51, 12 May 2009 (UTC) :And did you nominated him, Phin? Because only the nominator can fill that stuff out. Ardi as well still needs to accept the nomination. —'Excelsior,' The Flash - ([[User talk:SuperFlash101|Talk to me, talk to me, talk to me bay-bay!]]) 21:56, 12 May 2009 (UTC) :Attention: This nomination will be invalidated unless the needed points linked to are not added by tomorrow night. —'Excelsior,' The Flash - ([[User talk:SuperFlash101|Talk to me, talk to me, talk to me bay-bay!]]) 02:30, 13 May 2009 (UTC) ::What do I need to do to fix this thing anyway? Phin68 02:33, 13 May 2009 (UTC) :::You need to write something about me that will convince others to vote for me.—Ardi Correspondence Talk 02:36, 13 May 2009 (UTC) Not entirely sure why this was marked as "closed" earlier, but because the nomination is not unanimous, this will be under discussion for another week. The way this works is that a consensus must be reached. This doesn't mean a "simple majority rules", but rather than all concerns are dealt with. Speaking directly to Flash's concerns, if you don't agree with the criteria laid out for becoming an admin, then this should have been discussed when the policy was originally posted six weeks ago before RRabbit42's nomination. I'm not sure what you want the criteria to be, but since there hasn't been any objections to the minimum criteria before this nomination was made, Ardi's nomination should be judged based on the current criteria. He has racked up a thousand edits in the last 60+ days. This is ten times the minimum required edits in only twice the minimum amount of time. More than half of these edits were in the Main Namespace. Granted, many of the edits were a minute or two apart to the same article, but if we really dive into other users' edits, we'd find similar issues. We can't fault him for that, can we? —Topher 05:09, 14 May 2009 (UTC)